Thames Credit

[foolishgirl]

 

 

Hooray!!

 

Well done Afta, another one bites the dust....

 

Just make sure you hang on to that correspondence - there's no saying the OC or someone other gullible DCA won't try & pass it on again.

 

At least you can make that cup of tea a glass of something more celebratory tonight. Enjoy....

 

[afta05]

Have a new letter today from Lowell. They have bought a debt from Creation which was being collected by Roxburgh. They failed to produce a CCA agreement in June and I wrote to put the account in dispute. Creation has now written to say that they have sold the debt to Lowell and Lowell have sent their first letter. I have sent them a bog off letter as foolishgirl suggested with a previous switch of DCAs for another account. I'll keep you posted but am I on the right track?

[foolishgirl]

I have sent them a bog off letter as foolishgirl suggested with a previous switch of DCAs for another account. I'll keep you posted but am I on the right track?

 

Absolutely the right track Afta!!

[afta05]

Lowell have sent a follow up letter dated one week later saying much the same as before. My earlier reply may not have reached them though because of the Christmas post. I have replied this time with a formal complaint and intend to report them to TS if they write again demanding money. I don't plan on writing to them directly again.

[afta05]

Just to keep you up to date, Lowell answered the complaint by saying that they have referred my "query" to OC and reject the complaint. I replied saying that now that they had been told the alleged debt was in dispute I did not expect to hear from them again.

 

There have been no other letters from any of the other DCAs I have been helped with in this thread so I feel much better now. Thanks for all the help everyone, especially foolishgirl, who has been a tower of strength. Shall we close the thread now and if I start getting grief again, start another as this has got quite long?

[foolishgirl]

Well done afta, looks as though you've seen Lowells off. If you do hear from them, refer it to TS.

 

Using the right tactics with DCAs is always the solution & I'm glad you're not afraid to open the post any longer.

 

You may wish to leave this thread open for a little while so that if there are any further developments, people can follow your story through easily but it's up to you.

 

With best wishes - FG

[afta05]

It's not over! Lowell sent me half a rain forest today with copies of OC statements going back years. What they didn't send though was a copy of an agreement that I had asked the previous DCA for last June. They sent this letter.

 

"We write in respect of the above debt which as previously notified in writing we have purchased from Creation Financial.

 

We are now entitled to receive payment of £xxx from you and enclose a copy of your statement as requested [not true]. Neither Creation nor ourselves are aware of any reason for non-payment.

 

Please kindly make payment of the outstanding debt or contact us within 7 days of the date of this letter to agree acceptable payment proposals, failing which we reserve the right to instruct our solicitors to issue legal proceedings against you withour further notice".

 

My instinct now is to write and complain to TS but wonder if there is an example somewhere I can use. Should I copy the complaint to Lowell or write to them separately sticking to the bogoff line?

 

I think this is all bluff and as I understand it, they are not entitled to claim money from me at all.

[foolishgirl]

Think you need to resend the 'I do not acknowledge this debt' letter to Lowells again, reminding that they are still in breach of your S77/78 request for a CCA & that you will welcome an opportunity to discuss the matter further in court if they would like to issue a summons for recovery of the alleged debt.

 

Additionally you could send a request under CPR 31 that should elicit whether they actually can produce a CCA (unlikely) & then go for an order under S142 for unenforceability of the agreement. That would see them off forever.

 

You should read this thread if you haven't already done so on using CPR31. It contains templates etc.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.html

Edited January 23, 2009 by foolishgirl
wrong section

[eeeezzzyy]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hooray!!

 

 

 

Well done Afta, another one bites the dust....

 

 

 

 

 

Just make sure you hang on to that correspondence - there's no saying the OC or someone other gullible DCA won't try & pass it on again.

 

 

 

 

 

At least you can make that cup of tea a glass of something more celebratory tonight. Enjoy....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just a note on thames credit, i had an old Asda credit card account with them, havent heard anything from them since Oct 08...until friday of this week week...AKTIV CAPITAL....(was Thames Credit), wrote to me asking for £1098 for Tiny Computers...all well and good except, ive never owned a Tiny Computer !!!!...but no mention of Asda CC so i politely asked them to provide me with the erm evidence and if they cant please dont darken my door again !!!

[foolishgirl]

.all well and good except, ive never owned a Tiny Computer !!!!...

 

:D They're obviously referring to their brain size!

[afta05]

Update. Have had 2 more threatening letters from one part of Lowells (computer generated) and one more conciliatory from the complaints dept saying that they have asked OC for the copy agreement but would I be kind enough to let them know why do I object to paying? I have written to TS who have acknowledged my complaint and I have written another complaint to Lowell. Looked up a bit about CPR 31 foolishgirl, for which I'm grateful, and it looks to me that it is a way to go if Court papers turn up?

[foolishgirl]

Update. Have had 2 more threatening letters from one part of Lowells (computer generated) and one more conciliatory from the complaints dept saying that they have asked OC for the copy agreement but would I be kind enough to let them know why do I object to paying?

 

Oh ye of little brain! Not to mention left hand not knowing right hand!

I have written to TS who have acknowledged my complaint and I have written another complaint to Lowell. Looked up a bit about CPR 31 foolishgirl, for which I'm grateful, and it looks to me that it is a way to go if Court papers turn up?

 

Have another cup of tea afta, this could take some time..

[afta05]

You may be interesed in this reply to my complaint to TS about Lowell. Do you agree?

"Under Section 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 it is the credit provider who must provide a copy of the original credit agreement within 14 days of a written request being made and not the debt collection agency. Therefore, if you have only requested this from the debt collection agencies, the request must be made again to the original alleged credit provider together with a £1 fee. If the said credit provider failed to supply this after 28 days, then details of your complaint could be passed for information purposes only to the relevant Trading Standards office as there would potentially be a breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Please be aware this would not assist you with your civil case.

 

Regrettably, your local Trading Standards office do not offer civil intervention, therefore, if you remain in dispute, you may want to seek further advice from your local Citizens Advice Bureaux (CAB) where they may have specialist who deal with finance matters. The CAB would be able to check through any documents you have and provide further advice.

Even though you have raised a dispute over the debt this would not prevent it being sold to another debt collection agency."

[volvodriver]

Others far more knowledgeable than I will come along and tell you this is nonsense and factually wrong.

 

Wait for that knowledgeable poster, then complain to the manager of the TS and maybe your MP - peoplwe are being paid to write this and should be brought to book for their incompetence.

[volvodriver]

The more I read it the more incensed I become - its utter rubbish.

[volvodriver]

You may be interesed in this reply to my complaint to TS about Lowell. Do you agree?

 

"Under Section 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 it is the credit provider who must provide a copy of the original credit agreement within 14 days of a written request being made and not the debt collection agency. WRONG - its whoever is chasing the debt Therefore, if you have only requested this from the debt collection agencies, the request must be made again to the original alleged credit provider together with a £1 fee.WRONG If the said credit provider failed to supply this after 28 days, WRONG 14 days then details of your complaint could be passed for information purposes only to the relevant Trading Standards office as there would potentially be a breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Please be aware this would not assist you with your civil case.

 

Regrettably, your local Trading Standards office do not offer civil intervention,NO THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THERE TO ENFORCE THE LAW therefore, if you remain in dispute, you may want to seek further advice from your local Citizens Advice Bureaux (CAB) where they may have specialist who deal with finance matters. The CAB would be able to check through any documents you have and provide further advice.

 

Even though you have raised a dispute over the debt this would not prevent it being sold to another debt collection agency."WRONG

 

I hope this gets you started.

Edited February 17, 2009 by volvodriver
spelling

[foolishgirl]

Absolute rubbish afta & typical Lowells!

 

Under the Law of Property Act (assignment) they have the duties & liabilites of the debt & that includes providing a CCA. For the purposes of the law they are the creditor.

 

I've lost the reference I'm looking for - I'll find it & get back to you with the ammo to fire.

[afta05]

Wow! Thanks for that. Good to know that we have people to turn to who know what the real answer is!

[foolishgirl]

OK, here it is:

 

In the case of a simple assignment there is a duty on the DCA to pass on your request to the OC -

 

S175 of CCA1974:

175 Duty of persons deemed to be agents

Where under this Act a person is deemed to receive a notice or payment as agent of the creditor or owner under a regulated agreement, he shall be deemed to be under a contractual duty to the creditor or owner to transmit the notice, or remit the payment, to him forthwith.

 

In the case of an absolute assignment, where the DCA has purchased not only the rights but the duties aswell, S189 applies:

 

“creditor” means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement

or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by

assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit

agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

 

 

 

Either way, Lowells have to produce the goodies!!

 

Suggest you write back with the above afta.

[afta05]

Thanks for your help foolishgirl - have gone back to TS with your references suggesting that they might reconsider their opinion in light of this evidence. Will let you know the outcome.

[foolishgirl]

Sorry afta, didn't read it properly, I'm tired tonight - thought it was Lowells that had written to you.

 

That is disgusting MISinformation from TS! Although not unsurprising. The quality of TS seems to vary so much around the country & it sounds as though yours are definitely not up to the job. You're not alone, I've given up with mine.

 

The points volvodriver made above are very pertinent & should be stressed to TS with a severe weather warning that if they don't get their act together, you'll report it to your MP. But there again it depends on how good your MP is & how well versed/interested in consumer law so don't expect too much.

[afta05]

Here is the response now from TS - not a lot of help except to lodge Lowell's name with them. I think I'll leave it there as Lowell have not written to me for 6 whole days now! Lowell might be reviewing their options, so I'll have that cup of tea now.

 

After further discussions with my manager, Consumer Direct feel that it would appear that Lowell are the owner of the debt and not acting as agents to the original credit provider. When debt collection agencies pursue a debt it is normally as a result of them 'buying' the debt off the credit provider. Unless your paperwork indicates otherwise, then potentially this is the position [i did tell them it was] and Section 175 of the consumer Credit Act 1974 would not be relevant.

West Yorkshire Trading Standards have been made aware of your complaint against Lowell for information purposes only, however, they will not assist you with your dispute as you are not a resident of West Yorkshire . As previously advised your local Trading Standards Office do not offer civil assistance, so in order to pursue the matter further you would require the assistance of a solicitor to provide further advice.

[foolishgirl]

Here is the response now from TS - not a lot of help except to lodge Lowell's name with them. I think I'll leave it there as Lowell have not written to me for 6 whole days now! Lowell might be reviewing their options, so I'll have that cup of tea now.

 

After further discussions with my manager, Consumer Direct feel that it would appear that Lowell are the owner of the debt and not acting as agents to the original credit provider. When debt collection agencies pursue a debt it is normally as a result of them 'buying' the debt off the credit provider. Unless your paperwork indicates otherwise, then potentially this is the position [i did tell them it was] and Section 175 of the consumer Credit Act 1974 would not be relevant.

 

Oh, so in that case theyr'e also conveniently forgetting that S189 applies instead?!!

West Yorkshire Trading Standards have been made aware of your complaint against Lowell for information purposes only, however, they will not assist you with your dispute as you are not a resident of West Yorkshire . As previously advised your local Trading Standards Office do not offer civil assistance, so in order to pursue the matter further you would require the assistance of a solicitor to provide further advice.

 

This is not a civil case - Lowells are breaking the law, OFT (of which TS are the enforcement agency) are there to see that the law is not broken. So why aren't they doing their duty? This is like a policeman watching a burglar break into a house & not arrresting him because the burglar hasn't stolen anything.

 

 

Unfortunately it's obvious that TS are doing their level best not to get involved or do any work on behalf of their employers - you & me!! Makes me so mad.

 

From your point of view afta, think you've gone as far as you can with these idiots. Suggest you just stand firm with Lowells & if necessary defend it in court.

[afta05]

Lowell have come up with a copy of the original agreement. There is no doubt that it appears to be a genuine copy but I wonder if it contains all the information that it needs to. I can't for example see interest rates mentioned. (It was for a store card). What must the agreement contain apart from my signature to be enforceable?

 

This has gone on so long I'm ready to give up and make an offer but then I will be acknowledging that the debt is mine.

[foolishgirl]

Don't despair afta.

 

The agreement must contain the prescibed terms ( & that includes interest rate!) in the correct format.

 

Can you post up the agreement blanking out all the personal details that might identify you?

 

Use Image hosting, free photo sharing & video sharing at Photobucket if you can't attach direct.